Thread: Intel Core i7 launched

Intel Core i7 launched

It is here; the Intel Core 17 processors have finally been launched worldwide. As part of the worldwide launch there was also a lavishly arranged function here in Mumbai at the Taj President on Tuesday.

Intel has delivered the fastest desktop processor on Earth to the most demanding users on Earth, the ones who are using their PCs for video, gaming and music. When you couple, what is Intel's biggest leap in chip design, with other incredible innovations like Intel's solid state drives, the Core i7 processor has refined the computer of tomorrow".

Based on a completely new architecture, the Core i7 processors are markedly different from their predecessors and have many advantages over them. There is the increased parallelism with the processor being capable of executing 33% more concurrent micro-ops simultaneously.

There is also the faster unaligned cache access and faster synchronization primitives. Intel has also implemented a new 2nd level branch predictor to avoid situations when execution units stand idle. Yet another improvement is the cache sub-system that has been redesigned from scratch.

There is a 2nd level 512 entry translation look-aside buffer (TLB) in addition to the 1st level TLB to reduce the TLB miss rate. In addition to this, there is also three-level cache hierarchy: 64KB L1 (32KB for data and 32KB for instructions), 256 KB L2 cache per core, 8 MB L3 cache (2 MP per core) shared by all cores. This is different from what Intel used to do until now - all cache on the processor.

The Core i7 processor also marks an end of the legendary FSB (Front Side Bus). These processors feature the new Quick Path Interconnect (QPI) bus, which is Intel's answer to AMD's Hypertransport 3.0 and a three channel memory controller supporting 1066 MHz DDR3 memory is present on-chip.

Multi-threading technology (similar to hyper-threading of the NetBurst architecture processors) is also featured on these CPUs with SSE 4.2 instructions. These are capable of handling up to eight software threads on four processor cores. With a TDP rated at 130 W, these also have energy-saving features and you can shut down unwanted cores to reduce power consumption.

Turbo Boost technology allows the cores to bump up the clock speeds when deemed necessary. This quad-core chip is manufactured using the 45nm process, sporting 731 million transistors.

Combined with the Intel X58 chipset-based motherboards with LGA1366 socket, these are incompatible with older motherboards. Currently, these can only be used with motherboards based on the Intel X58 chipset.

Intel has released three different models of the Core i7 - all quad core variants with hyper-threading :

• Core i7 920 clocked at 2.66 GHz priced at $284 (approximately Rs.14,063),
  
• Core i7 940 clocked at 2.66 GHz priced at $562 (approximately Rs.27,830),
  
• Core i7 965 XE (Extreme Edition) clocked at 3.2 GHz priced at $999 (approximately Rs.49,470)

(Prices are per unit in lots of 1000)

More Info on InteL Core i7:
Link 1
Link 2

Somebody allready got the nehalem board in India 2 months ago. One is a pretty famous Indian based liquid nitro overclocker who got gigabyte x58 board and another one has it for reviews. I

i am sure prices will come down rapidly once a new motherboard technology comes

I am more concerned about high latency in rams and extremely high TDP in the core is what is on my mind. changing from 800/1000 mhz on OC to ddr3 system and using 1333mhz and 1600mhz rams is practically silly. They need to make 2000mhz as standard and bring down the timings on the new chip if people migrate from ddr2 to ddr3.

Originally Posted by The Sorcerer

Somebody allready got the nehalem board in India 2 months ago. One is a pretty famous Indian based liquid nitro overclocker who got gigabyte x58 board and another one has it for reviews. I

I would not recommend buying corei7 processors yet ....... Cause faster processors "Westmere" also known as Nehalem-c will be released next year [2009]

And Processors based on a totally new architecture "SandyBridge " will be released in 2010 .

So if you buy corei7 now by 2010 it ll be badly outdated .

Sandy Bridge is the codename for a processor Microarchitecture that is being developed by Intel and is the planned successor to Nehalem. Intel started development of Sandy Bridge in 2006. Sandy Bridge uses the 32 nm manufacturing methods from Westmere (formerly known as Nehalem-C) and applies it to the new Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. The former codename for this core was Gesher (means 'bridge' in Hebrew), but that codename was abandoned on 17 April 2007 because a political party in Israel is also named Gesher, as mentioned in Justin Rattner's keynote at IDF Spring 2007.
-Courtesy Wikipedia

these are beautiful

Originally Posted by ShAdOwCoN

So if you buy corei7 now by 2010 it ll be badly outdated .

I wasnt. I allready have a pretty good system .

these ones are beautiful

Cool. Lets wait and see whats next.

Phenom II have given some good results. 3.6 ghz on air overclock and according to previews they scale very well compared to the i7 processors. These are engineering samples though, so retailing can be better.

really wish intel had implemented the QPI arch earlier, AMD has had it for ages, now i hav 2 hav 2 wait for another few yrs to upgrade

Yea I'll wait before upgrading too. Reasons : for i7 prices to fall or newer products to come out. And DirectX 11 to be released. Then I'll buy a whole new PC... no upgrades.

Once upon a time I used to buy a new desktop or a laptop with every other new technology launch... learnt my lessons and spent a fortune on these boxes.
I try staying atleast 2 years behind the latest technology and this ensures I save a lot of money and get the best tried and tested products

I have a desktop with D820 2.8Ghz processor and Ive just upgraded the ram on this box does everything for me... cleaning, washing and even gets a cup of tea for me in the morning

Intel will again release Precoessors based on an architecture thats newer than the Corei7's Nehalem architecture , This will make corei7 outdated within 2 years of its release .... People who want to upgrade should wait for a while and see which processor becomes mainstream before u upgrade .

Originally Posted by ShAdOwCoN

Intel will again release Precoessors based on an architecture thats newer than the Corei7's Nehalem architecture , This will make corei7 outdated within 2 years of its release .... People who want to upgrade should wait for a while and see which processor becomes mainstream before u upgrade .

whats the new architecture going to be ? This one has been in the news for atleast over a year, could it possibly be replaced so soon ?

Originally Posted by newprouser

whats the new architecture going to be ? This one has been in the news for atleast over a year, could it possibly be replaced so soon ?

The new Architecture is 'Sandy Bridge' .... They started devoloping it in 2006 ... i am surprised u were not aware of it as its quiet an old news

The answer to your question ... i ll quote wiki

Intel's plans are to introduce new microarchitectures every two years, so this processor should debut in 2010. Intel has stated that they "are evaluating options to adjust Sandy Bridge schedule to ensure sufficient Nehalem lifecycle," and due to some Nehalem variants to be released in 2010, Sandy Bridge may be released later than originally planned

Originally Posted by ShAdOwCoN

The new Architecture is 'Sandy Bridge' .... They started devoloping it in 2006 ... i am surprised u were not aware of it as its quiet an old news

The answer to your question ... i ll quote wiki

Yea i had no clue about this new architecture. wow.

I guess then technology will be a double edged sword , since we can enjoy new technolgy makes older products cheaper and at the same time the shorted life period will make our peripherals obselete very soon.

Originally Posted by newprouser

Yea i had no clue about this new architecture. wow.

I guess then technology will be a double edged sword , since we can enjoy new technolgy makes older products cheaper and at the same time the shorted life period will make our peripherals obselete very soon.

Exactly

Originally Posted by newprouser

really wish intel had implemented the QPI arch earlier, AMD has had it for ages, now i hav 2 hav 2 wait for another few yrs to upgrade

Even when AMD had it 4 YEARS Intel ended up doin a LOT better than them .

the next processor will basically be a die shrink and a few minor changes (may be more cache,etc). I m guessing seeing their tick-tock charts.

Originally Posted by rajan1311

Even when AMD had it 4 YEARS Intel ended up doin a LOT better than them

I would be nice if you could give more details as to why, I don't see any difference in their architectures anyway..

Originally Posted by newprouser

I would be nice if you could give more details as to why, I don't see any difference in their architectures anyway..

arey, what i meant is that AMD has been dealing with Integrated memory controllers for a long time but Intel has used it the first time and has produced a much better product. I dont know anything abt the architecture. Maybe shadow could help us with the technical stuff.

Originally Posted by newprouser

I would be nice if you could give more details as to why, I don't see any difference in their architectures anyway..

Y Intel did it better than AMD even though it was their first time i cannot answer ....

But as far as QPI[Intel] vs HT[AMD] is concerned

Here HT = Hyper Transport and not Hyper Threading

Both architectures achieve the same goal but there is a difference .
QPI Interconnect is faster than HT.This is because the maximum transfer rate of HT technology is 10.4 GB/s [which is already slower than QPI ], but current Phenom processors use a lower transfer rate of 7.2 GB/s. So Intel Core i7 will have an external bus 78% faster than the one used on AMD Phenom processors !. Other CPUs from AMD like Athlon and Athlon X2 use an even lower transfer rate, 4 GB/s .

I dunno why Phenom does not run at the specified max spec of HT3.0

Originally Posted by ShAdOwCoN

Y Intel did it better than AMD even though it was their first time i cannot answer ....

But as far as QPI[Intel] vs HT[AMD] is concerned

Here HT = Hyper Transport and not Hyper Threading

Both architectures achieve the same goal but there is a difference .
QPI Interconnect is faster than HT.This is because the maximum transfer rate of HT technology is 10.4 GB/s [which is already slower than QPI ], but current Phenom processors use a lower transfer rate of 7.2 GB/s. So Intel Core i7 will have an external bus 78% faster than the one used on AMD Phenom processors !. Other CPUs from AMD like Athlon and Athlon X2 use an even lower transfer rate, 4 GB/s .

I dunno why Phenom does not run at the specified max spec of HT3.0

wow one would have thought after all these yrs , they would have achieved something.. too bad AMD...

Originally Posted by ShAdOwCoN

Y Intel did it better than AMD even though it was their first time i cannot answer ....

But as far as QPI[Intel] vs HT[AMD] is concerned

Here HT = Hyper Transport and not Hyper Threading

Both architectures achieve the same goal but there is a difference .
QPI Interconnect is faster than HT.This is because the maximum transfer rate of HT technology is 10.4 GB/s [which is already slower than QPI ], but current Phenom processors use a lower transfer rate of 7.2 GB/s. So Intel Core i7 will have an external bus 78% faster than the one used on AMD Phenom processors !. Other CPUs from AMD like Athlon and Athlon X2 use an even lower transfer rate, 4 GB/s .

I dunno why Phenom does not run at the specified max spec of HT3.0

All what u have said is true, but, is it really the HT/QP speeds that make the diff. I mean, that will make very little difference in our day-to-day applications. Also, maybe we will get to see greater HT speeds when we get AM3 cpu's with DDR3 memory.

^ Obviously Only on resource intensive apps u r going to see the difference .Performance is not measured for everyday apps .

Performance is measured using Stress Testing . i.e a test that ll squeeze every drop of performance from it .

I failed to mention 1 more point [so as not to confuse]

Current Processors that use HT3.0 operate at only around 70% of the what HT3.0 is actually capable of delivering . I dunno y . So future processors will have faster .

BUT still that ll be slower than QPI .


And yes this is the main reason , there are other minor reasons in which both QPI and AMD score against each other , but this is the one that counts .The External bus is the most important for any device , its the supply line ... without enough data going to and fro from the processor the processor can never process much data however fast it is ..... so the speeds are very determinable, thats the reason y they decided to replace FSB with QPI and HT